Getting the figures wrong
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) have had to pull the recently launched GreenHouse Gas (GHG) conversion rates to be used by businesses to calculate their footprint in advance of reduction measures, after it was discovered that their figures were flawed and that there were ‘other data and methodology’ concerns and ‘inconsistencies between the way in which overseas and domestic electricity is accounted’, according to sustainability consultancy Best Foot Forward (BFF).
In its haste to get companies to measure themselves (perhaps in order to make it easier to set metrics that will guarantee to raise levies and fines?) the government, via DEFRA, has found itself wanting in the maths department – no surprise really, when you see what’s happened to the economy in general, but one would have thought that, with a dedicated environment minister, the process might have been a little more assured.
What this, albeit one-column-on-page-nine, item does illustrate however is that business had better beware. It does not take a crystal ball gazer to see that it is only a matter of time before the definition of a limited company that must meet the requirements of the Companies Act 2006 is amended to widen the net of companies that will need to comply - and the Carbon Reduction Commitment which, at the time of going to press, will only affect the non-manufacturing super-users, looks like a ready vehicle to be ‘tweaked’ over time so that the govt. can afford to pay the penalty for exceeding the UK’s carbon credit limit and having to resort to trading with other nations to buy more.
In fact, with all the slapdash work going on at the minute, it appears that the only people who are profiting (as usual) are the carbon traders, who are earning bonuses as if there is no tomorrow… which, if we keep burning carbon at the present rate, there won’t be!
So, is there light at the end of the tunnel? Of course there is; but UK plc needs to forge ahead without constant reliance on the hoped-for guidance from central government. After all, the original definitions of corporate social responsibility (and let’s not forget that this is where all this stems from) was formed voluntarily by the business community as a voluntary code of practice that promoted sustainability in the widest sense of the word. We should not be swayed by the fact that it has been hi-jacked by the suits in Westminster as:
[a] a means to deflect electorate attention away from ‘bad news’ (much as the Pandemic Flu Hotline is being used today) and
[b] a means to create complementary revenue streams to those that exist already, positioned on a dedicated, and therefore separate, platform to existing means of levying taxes and fines.
If we just go back to basics and re-read the definition, we’ll have a solid basis for long term growth through practices that not only make optimum use of available and diminishing resources, but also practices that will endear our target customer demographic to our brand for longer.
And if all that makes sense, stop downloading sloppy paperwork from DEFRA and get a specialist in… or just get on with it.
